Social media snags 4 U.S. residents allegedly supporting Taliban

The FBI has arrested 4 men who allegedly were planning on attacking Americans in support of jihadists.

These folks were using social media (facebook) to post radical video/audio files, according to the FBI.

They were apprehended after 3 of the suspects sold personal belongings and bought airline tickets to travel from Mexico City to Istanbul, Turkey, on
November 18. Their final destination was Afghanistan according to the FBI.

Jihadist social media postings helped lead to the arrest and charging of four Los Angeles area men, who were allegedly on their way to Afghanistan to
train with the Taliban and join al Qaeda, federal officials said.
They were also plotting to kill American soldiers and bomb government installations, according to a joint statement Monday by the FBI and the U.S.
Attorney in Los Angeles.
One of the men, a U.S. citizen born in Afghanistan, encouraged two of the others to embrace violent Islamic doctrine by introducing them online to
radical teachings, including those of deceased U.S.-born al-Qaeda imam Anwar al-Awlaki.

On one hand, I am pleased that these four were apprehended prior to doing harm, on the other, I am wondering if there is another route to go to save
these young folks from being drawn into this radical ideology? Most seem so young and perhaps just need to be taken away from that kind of influence,
especially if they have been monitored for over a year..

But there are times when you need to unite a country against a common enemy, and to have everyone in the right place for their Two Minutes Hate. So
rather than educate and help, it's 'better' for the FBI to encourage this behaviour, solicit what they need, make the arrest and be hailed as
heroes.

Doesn't hurt that it helps demonise Muslims and can be used to more social media control and monitoring either.

seeing your follow up reply, JacK, I'd agree with you entirely. there should have been, at some point, an opportunity or at least, attempt to deter
their course, so to speak.

edit on 11/20/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)

These days, they usually try to avoid entrapment by giving the mark multiple chances to change his plans, explaining that there are many ways to
follow their religion peacefully, but I always imagine the conversations are a little more emotionally loaded than is reported, more like "So you're
sure you want to do this, right? You're not backing out on us?"

Originally posted by sepermeru
... but I always imagine the conversations are a little more emotionally loaded than is reported, more like "So you're sure you want to do this,
right? You're not backing out on us?"

same here, thereby making it far more unlikely that the individual will backout or away from their 'intended' path.

The could just been stupid pranksters boasting crap on the so popular site as most youngsters in the US been unemployed have nothing else to do, but I
forgot they were men, so I guess I trust the FBI, homeland of deception to protect me after all.

I don't trust any social media and the only place I ever post is here in ATS, maybe once on the Military. com forum to show my disappointment to the
increases of charges in Tricare.

Beside that I see no reason why spewing my beans on social media like Facebroke, I mean face book.

Stupidity is what I call anybody that uses this places to like if they were their private diaries.

I think the FBI functioned far better when they were basically a 'uniformed plain clothes' law enforcement agency in the strictest sense of that
term. Bank Robbery, Human Trafficking and the variety of other hard and solid crimes that were their stock and trade. They really are getting muddier
and muddier for just what they are doing and where the lines are as they've left the traditional role and gone to playing outright detective /
counter terrorist / swat team roles as a regular thing. Whatever else Hoover was, he was right to keep them almost comically straight and narrow types
as I've read about it.

I'd say we need a new agency for things like bank robbery and human trafficking but then really, the absurdity of it is sitting right there.

How many whole agencies do they actually need keeping us safe from what they either create or ...in this case...fail on the 'serve' side of what
that job is supposed to be in deterring outright stupid, IMO.

Another point on this, I won't dispute real threats exist...but Americans off to Jihad in Afghanistan sounds almost like stopping them was a
favor....It's almost a case of no need to pile on with destroying them totally and I'm only half joking. I wonder how many Americans have gone on
their own with ideas of either side (Jihad or dreams of bounties)....and never were heard from again?

I would be willing to bet that the FBI bought them their ticket to Afghanistan.....er ....well maybe just loaned them the monsy while patting them on
the back and telling them to go for it.......(I can see some agent buying up their possessions with handfuls of bills)
The FBI has ZERO credibility.
They have degenerated into a black ops arm of the goverments various agendas.....
The Retarded Goons and the Sellouts stay in, and the really good people get out......
Thus the drop in the intelligence level of agents, and the lameness of their "cases".
How many COPS does AMERIKA NEED? Enough to be able to entrap teenagers into life sentences it seems......
In a country of armed citizens....the need for excessive numbers of law enforcement is moot.
The truth is that these LEOs are the hidden army of goons which the PTB will use against the people when its time.
They will happily shoot US citizens (as they have proven many times over......)
They seem to enjoy their power and authority far too much......and their trained in the arrogant stance they take.....and the violently psychopathic,
knee jerk reactions they exhibit when encountering citizens versed in the constitution are a product of their brainwashing.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.